“There are many places like it,” Mr. Gilles said. “It’s the second choice, the safety school, they have been given a mandate to up their ranking nationally.”

Only one of the three faculty members charged with picking students to fill the three remaining spots is more interested in an applicant’s talent than more pressing concerns, like affirmative action, contributions from wealthy parents and how the candidate could enhance Piedmont’s reputation. The action takes place entirely in the cramped office of Elaine Callaway, chairwoman of the performing arts department, which is littered with discarded folders of overlooked applications.

The other two faculty members making decisions are Martin Hemmings, a full-time professor who has grown bitter and longs for Ms. Callaway’s position, and Joanna Newley, an adjunct who hopes to become permanent.

Ms. Newley, sincere but naïve, gravitates toward the only portfolio that shows real talent. Both Ms. Callaway and Mr. Hemmings cajole, manipulate and push to further their agendas, trying to win Ms. Newley over to ensure their preferred candidate gets into school and mocking the inequities of college admissions along the way.

Mr. Hemmings advises Ms. Newley to “disregard the letters of recommendation” and “be wary of the statements of purpose,” tossing aside the extraneous parts of an application and disregarding everything but an applicant’s writing sample and her ethnic and geographic background, as well as her financial status.

When they finally run across a truly talented applicant, Gifford Hamblin from Kentucky, both Mr. Hemmings and Ms. Callaway say they will support Hamblin if Ms. Newley agrees to back their favored candidates.

“If life were fair, everything would be in chaos,” Ms. Callaway replies when Ms. Newley asks why the process is so unjust. “Especially life at a university.”

Applicants, take heart: Mr. Gilles said that the play is exaggerated to make a point. “It’s made up, it’s a work of fiction, all drama is heightened reality,” he said reassuringly.

Mr. Gilles has worked on committees reviewing submissions for the N.Y.U. Film School, though never at the level depicted in his play, and he said the idea, originally intended as an Adam Sandler film, occurred to him after a casual conversation with members of an admissions board. He hopes the play conveys the difficulty of selecting a small number of people from a pool of talented applicants amid the other concerns admissions boards have to consider.

“It’s daunting, it’s difficult, it’s frustrating, you really have a responsibility,” he said. The process sometimes risks devolving into “three opposing personalities in the same room. Kind of like an old married couple who fight all the time.”

Mr. Gilles did not think the real world of college admissions was anywhere near as bleak as his play makes it appear. He said that students “should know that it’s very equitable. They should know that the people who make decisions really want to help.”
What roles have readers of The Choice played in the college admissions process? Are you terrified of what goes on behind the closed doors of admissions departments? Please tell us in the comment box below.

I was on the faculty/student admissions committee at the University of Ca./Hastings College of the Law many years ago. We had automatic acceptances and automatic rejections based on a formula derived from an applicant’s UCGPA and LSAT score. We never saw those applications.
For the group that we reviewed that fell between the two cutoffs our decision closely paralleled the UCGPA/LSAT. That is, applicants close to the automatic acceptance cutoff were the ones most likely to get in. I realize this was a graduate school program but it may be relevant to undergraduate admissions too.

If you are an Asian woman, you are a shoo-in to be accepted? Huh? Old information. This is the group finding it hardest to gain college acceptance now as there are more of them who are qualified than anyone else. Smart white/Hispanic/AA males who can pay for college? They are now the hottest/scarcest commodity. A lot has changed since the play authors went to college.

This play is a sharp, well-acted and entertaining behind the scenes look at the politics and back-stabbing process of admissions to a fictional performing arts graduate program. Veteran actress, Kathryn Kates, gives a chillingly real performance. In one scene on the phone to an off-stage parent, Ms. Kates is jaw-droppingly powerful and brings a depth of reality only a true master of her craft can pull off. The other well-written and well-acted characters support and emphasize her power through their own – but in comparison weak – attempts at manipulating the process. A clever plot-twisting end wraps up this gem of a play perfectly. The surprisingly comfortable Canal Park Playhouse at 508 Canal Street supports the production well. If you want a crafty, well-acted peek into, “who’s behind that curtain” when it comes to the graduate admissions process, don’t miss this one!